Port management and operations

Port Management
and Operations
Third Edition

LLOYD’S
PRACTICAL
SHIPPING
GUIDES
Other titles in this series are:
Laytime and Demurrage in the Oil

Industry
by Malcolm Edkins and Ray Dunkley
(1998)
Chartering Documents
4th edition
by Harvey Williams
(1999)
Combined Transport Documents: A
Handbook of Contracts for the
Combined Transport Industry
by John Richardson
(2000)
Principles of Maritime Law
by Susan Hodges and Chris Hill

(2002)
The Handbook of Maritime Economics
and Business
by Costas Th. Grammenos
(2002)
Maritime Law
6th edition
by Chris Hill
(2004)
ISM Code: A Practical Guide to the
Legal and Insurance Implications
2nd edition
By Dr Phil Anderson
(2005)

Risk Management in Port Operations,
Logistics and Supply-Chain Security
by Khalid Bichou, Michael G. H. Bell
and Andrew Evans
(2007)
Introduction to Marine Cargo
Management
by J. Mark Rowbotham
(2008)

Port Management
and Operations
BY
PROFESSOR PATRICK M.
ALDERTON
M.Phil., Extra Master, Dip.Maths,
M.C.I.T.
THIRD EDITION

Informa Law
Mortimer House
37–41 Mortimer Street
London W1T 3JH
law.enquiries@informa.com
an Informa business
First edition 1999
Second edition 2005
Third edition 2008
© Patrick M. Alderton 2008
British Library Cataloguing in Publication
Data
Acatalogue record for this book is available

from the British Library
ISBN 978-1-84311-750-6
All rights reserved. No part of this publication
may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted, in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise, without the prior
written permission of Informa Law.
Whilst every effort has been made to ensure
that the information contained in this book is
correct, neither the author nor Informa Law can
accept any responsibility for any errors or
omissions or for any consequences resulting
therefrom.

Text set in 10/12pt Postscript Plantin by Tony
Lansbury, Tonbridge, Kent
Printed in Great Britain by MPG Books,
Bodmin, Cornwall
Printed on paper sourced from sustainable
sources

Preface
The aim of this book is to give a
universal presentation of the essential
elements of ports, covering their
administration, management, economics
and operation. As ports are among the
oldest forms of transport infrastructure
which have remained in continuous use,
and have been a vital part in the social
and economic growth of regions, it is

necessary to consider, at least briefly,
the historic development of ports in
order to understand many of their facets.
The purpose of this book is to give a
complete picture of the ports industry so
that those involved with ports can see
their own specific field of interest in
perspective and understand how the
basic model of the port operates within
the maritime transport industry. Maritime
transport is a rapidly changing industry
and, since the Second World War, it is
not sufficient to learn one’s business by
“sitting next to Nellie”. Modern
transport professionals must be able to
adapt to, and anticipate the implications

of, changes in the industry. Perhaps one
of the most important aspects of modern
management is the ability to manage
change and it is hoped that this book will
give an insight as to how port
management has coped with change over
the last century. This book also
endeavours to stress the importance of
ports, a factor which is often
overlooked. When Gary Crook of
UNCTAD was asked for a suitable title,
he suggested “Ports: The misunderstood
key to prosperity”.
Such an approach has become an
integral part of most of the professional
and academic courses that are concerned

with shipping, ports and transport. The
structure and content of this book are
based on the lectures given to, and the
interaction I have had with, students in
London and at the World Maritime
University in Malmö over the last 25
years.
In this third edition I have taken the
opportunity to update the material,
include any new developments, and
respond to user comments and any
criticisms arising from the earlier
editions.
I have tried to avoid the unnecessary
use of jargon in this book and hope that
the text will be readily understandable to

those with little knowledge of ports but
yet have sufficient depth to be of interest
and value to those professionally
engaged in the industry.
Where possible I have quoted actual
figures and statistics, as I have found it
easier for students to grasp the relative
merits of the size, importance and value
of a thing or concept by giving actual
data. However, students should be
aware that even the highest authorities
will not always agree on statistics, as in
their collection and selection, different
assumptions may be possible as the
precise control of the laboratory is not
usually available in the actual

commercial situation.
It is not anticipated that this book will
answer all the reader’s questions on
ports but it is hoped that it will stimulate
their curiosity on the subject. I have also
personally found that disagreement on a
subject can provide as valuable an
educational insight as agreement.
When discussing various aspects of
those persons engaged in ports and
shipping, I have tended to use the
pronouns he and him rather than she or
her. This is not meant to be sexist but
merely an attempt to save paper and to
avoid being verbally tedious. Although
the world of ports and shipping has

tended to be a male dominated business,
women do now occupy many of the
highest positions in the industry and the
terms he and she can in nearly all cases
be considered interchangeable.
PATRICK M. ALDERTON
March 2008

Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my colleagues and
friends at the World Maritime University
in Malmö and those at what was the
London Guildhall University and is now
the London Metropolitan University. I
would also like to thank those
professionally working in the industry
who have helped me, not only with data
but who have exchanged views with me
over coffee during the last 25 years or

so. A special acknowledgement of
gratitude is also due to those students
who have been so helpful and usually so
patient in developing and testing, not
only the material, but also the emphasis
and structure.
It would, of course, be invidious to
mention any particular names from the
many experienced and talented persons I
have been fortunate enough to be
associated with during the period while
compiling this book, but I must thank
Professor Ted Samson for his section on
the “Basic Argument” in the chapter on
Port Environmental Matters.

Contents
Preface
Acknowledgements
List of Figures
CHAPTER ONE: PORTS
Introduction—some basic points—the
importance of ports—fundamental
observations concerning ports—the
main functions and features of a port

—main facilities and services provided
by a port—some definitions—different
types of port—information about ports
—conclusion
CHAPTER TWO: PORT
DEVELOPMENT
Introduction—phases of port
development—growth in world trade
—changes in growth—developments in
terminal operation
CHAPTER THREE: IMPACT OF
CHANGING SHIP TECHNOLOGY
ON PORTS
Introduction—ship knowledge—ship
developments which influence port

development—effect of port time on
ship speed—other technical
developments affecting ports
CHAPTER FOUR: PORT
APPROACHES
Sea approaches—inland transport
CHAPTER FIVE: PORT
ADMINISTRATION, OWNERSHIP
AND MANAGEMENT
Port management: basic problems
—types of port ownership and
administration—organisations
concerning ports—boards governing a
port—port management development:
from a transport centre to a logistic

platform—the rise and fall of ports
—competition between ports
—information technology in logistics
—safety
CHAPTER SIX: PORT POLICY
General points on maritime policy
—corruption and hidden agendas
—port policy—EU port and transport
policy—relationship between port and
state (or area authority)—port
ownership—port and state financial
assistance—port pricing
CHAPTER SEVEN: BERTHS AND
TERMINALS
Number of berths required in a port

—berth size and layout—alternatives
to formal port systems—port logistics
CHAPTER EIGHT: CARGO AND
CARGO HANDLING
Basic definitions for cargo stowage on
the ship—pre-shipment planning, the
stowage plan and on-board stowage
—cargo positioning and stowage on
the terminal—ship stresses and
stability—developments in cargo
handling and terminal operation
—containers—equipment—safety of
cargo operations—cargo security
CHAPTER NINE: PORT LABOUR
Labour development—how dockers

were employed—how dockers were
paid—unions—numbers employed
—labour v technology—how labour is
managed
CHAPTER TEN: TIME IN PORT AND
SPEED OF CARGO HANDLING
Turnaround time in days for sailing
vessels 1863–1912—general cargo
—containers—bulk cargoes—tankers
—general operational delays—strikes
—port time other than berth time
—port delays (congestion)—port
productivity
CHAPTER ELEVEN: PORT COSTS,
PRICES AND REVENUE

How much does a port cost?—total
port charges—average port
disbursements (non cargo handling)
—cargo-handling costs—typical port
revenue and expenditure—port pricing
—costs and cost centres—current port
charges—port finance and profitability
CHAPTER TWELVE: PORT
ENVIRONMENTALMATTERS—
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
The organisations, Conventions and
Reports—the basic argument—the
causes of port environmental pollution
—a policy for sustainable development
in a port—emergency plans, personnel

List of Figures
Figure 1: The Port of London
Figure 2: Factors constraining port
development
Figure 3: Growth in world seaborne
trade
Figure 4: China dry bulk imports and
exports
Figure 5: The extended Porter Diamond
applied to seaports (adapted from

Haezendonck, 2002)
Figure 6: A “model” port (see Professor
J. Bird’s Major Seaports of the UK)
Figure 7: Layout for a typical berth
(1850–1900)
Figure 8: Typical break-bulk general
cargo terminals (1900, 1920, 1960)
Figure 9: Growth in world container
tonnage
Figure 10a: Container terminal, 1970
Figure 10b: Container terminal, 1980
Figure 10c: Container terminal, 1990
Figure 11: Ship and cargo tons
Figure 12: Typical relationship between
LOA and Dwt
Figure 13: Growth of world GRT

Figure 14a: Growth of the average ship
size (GT) showing with a draft greater
than 13 metres
Figure 14b: Percentage of ships versus
draft
Figure 15: Increasing size of container
ships
Figure 16: Economies of scale expected
for larger container ships with open
hatches
Figure 17: Direct and better “spotting”
Figure 18: Sea approaches
Figure 19: Vessel traffic services
Figure 20: Modes of distribution
Figure 21: Private sector involvement in
ports

Figure 22: Constraining influences on
port management
Figure 23: Optimum number of berths
required in a port
Figure 24: Relationship between berth
occupancy ratio and waiting ratio
Figure 25: Conventional breakbulk
general cargo berth
Figure 26: General layout of a container
terminal
Figure 27: Traffic paths
Figure 28: Tanker berth
Figure 29: Distance from ship/shore
interface to storage
Figure 30: Cross-section of a ship
inclined by external forces

Figure 31: Growth of containerisation
Figure 32: London—cargo tons v
dockers
Figure 33: Types of cranes
Figure 34: Some of the many varieties of
cargo gear available from a specialist
stevedore supplier
Figure 35: Gross average speed of cargo
handling per hatch for the entire stay
in port
Figure 36: Relationship between ship
size and cargo-handling speed
Figure 37: If using several cranes to
load and discharge
Figure 38: Scale loading speed for
Richards Bay

Figure 39: Basic data a port should
collect
Figure 40: Port productivity
Figure 41: Development of port costs
Figure 42: Shipowners’ major costs
expressed as a percentage
Figure 43: Global population and oil
consumption in 2025 (estimated)
Figure 44: Who pays for reception
facilities

Chapter One
Ports
Introduction—some basic points—the
importance of ports—fundamental
observations concerning ports—the
main functions and features of a port
—main facilities and services provided
by a port—some definitions—different
types of port—information about ports
—conclusion

Introduction
The purpose of this introductory chapter
is to introduce and stress a few basic
points which need to be made at the
beginning. Many of these points will be
repeated and amplified at later stages
throughout the book where the analysis
of the topic requires greater detail.
Throughout the book I have included
some historical details going back to the
beginning of the last century. This is
included not just to entertain those with
historical interests but to try to give an
understanding to those wishing to grasp

how and why a modern port operates
and functions. Most of the world’s major
ports invested heavily in developing
their infrastructure during the last
century. Much of this is still visible and
in many cases this heritage still forms
part of the infrastructure that the modern
port manager and port operator has to
deal with. There can be very few, if any,
large commercial undertakings which
have to perform in the modern world
encumbered with such a legacy from the
past and, until plastic disposable ports
are developed, presumably this problem
will continue. This is why port
management needs to get its forecasting

right. However, it is not just the
geographical location and physical
design that history can explain but also,
and perhaps more importantly, the
Zeitgeist and working culture of port
labour can in most cases be really
understood only when studied in its
historical context. Further, as stressed in
the Preface, modern transport
professionals must be able to adapt to,
and anticipate, the implications of
changes in the industry. Perhaps one of
the most important aspects of modern
management is the ability to manage
change and it is hoped that this book will
give an insight as to how port

management has coped with change over
the last century. The analysis of past
performance is the basis of virtually all
forecasting and our ability to anticipate
the optimum solutions to the port
decisions required in the next century
can be focused by insights gained from
the last.
Some Basic Points
Seaports are areas where there are
facilities for berthing or anchoring ships
and where there is the equipment for the

transfer of goods from ship to shore or
ship to ship. To use more modern jargon,
it is a ship/shore interface or a maritime
intermodal interface. From an historical
point of view the customs facility is
important because without it no
international commercial intercourse
was legally possible. In many older
ports the most imposing piece of
architecture on the waterfront is the
Custom House.
The major reference books on ports
list between 3,500 to 9,000 ports in the
world. The reason why the figure varies
is that the meaning and definition of a
port can vary. At one end of the scale a

large estuarial port may contain many
terminals which may be listed as
separate ports. At the other end of the
scale not every place where a small
vessel anchors to offload cargo may be
listed as a port.
The Importance of
Ports
Ports should be considered as one of the
most vital aspects of a national transport
infrastructure. For most trading nations

they are:
— The main transport link with
their trading partners and thus a
focal point for motorways and
railway systems.
— A major economic multiplier for
the nation’s prosperity. Not only
is a port a gateway for trade but
most ports attract commercial
infrastructure in the form of
banks, agencies, etc., as well as
industrial activity.
Ports should also be considered as one
of the most important aspects of
maritime transport because they are the

location:
— Where most maritime accidents
happen. This is inevitable, as it
is a focal point, usually in
shallow water, where ships
converge.
— Where cargo is damaged or
stolen. Again this is inevitable
as a port is a place where the
cargo is handled and a place
where valuables are
concentrated. One of the initial
reasons for building enclosed
docks at the beginning of the last
century was to reduce theft.

However, with full container
loads reducing handling in port
and the increasing speed of
throughput the significance of
this element should be reducing.
— Where repairs are carried out.
Although a port is obviously the
only place where many repairs
can be attempted the more
modern practice of planned
maintenance means that
shipowners can plan at which
port the repairs or maintenance
will be done.
— Where most costs are incurred.
Although some of these costs and

delays form part of the essential
and inevitable activities of a
port, others, such as documentary
costs and delays, are simply part
of an historical tradition which
could and should be changed.
— Where delays are most likely to
occur.
— Where surveys take place.
— Where most shipping services
are located, e.g. agents, brokers,
etc. This still seems to be the
case in spite of modern
communication systems.
— Where industries are situated.
This has greatly accelerated

since the Second World War.
— Where cargoes come from.
— Where customs and government
policies are implemented.
Dr Ernst Frankel, in his book Port
Planning and Development (1986),
estimates that “… only 40–45% of all
transport costs in international trade are
payable for productive transportation.
For general cargo the figure is probably
only 33%.” Much of the extra cost and
delay occurs in ports (but is not
necessarily caused by ports). As
indicated, ports are places where
numerous controls are imposed, such as

documentary controls, finance controls,
import controls, etc. For obvious
reasons ports have developed as areas
of storage while cargo waits for
distribution, further processing or
onward movement.
In Japan where there are officially
classified 1,100 ports and harbours (21
of which are rated as major ports for
international trading) the multiple role of
a port is well recognised as a:
— Distribution centre.
— Industrial zone and energy
supply base.
— Mercantile trading centre—

attracting banks, brokers and
traders.
— Urbanisation and city
redevelopment centre.
— Life activity base—this is
particularly the case for the
smaller rural ports.
— Maritime leisure base—yacht
marinas, dockside recreation
facilities, cruise ship terminal.
Note of the 21 ports rated as major ports
in Japan, Yokohama, Tokyo, Kobe,
Nagoya and Osaka handle the greater
percentage of foreign containerised
trade. Kobe was number 6 in the world

league of container ports before the great
Hanshin earthquake in the early 1990s
reduced its position seriously. However,
by 1997 it had recovered 80% of its
previous container throughput and by
2002 was rated number around 24 in the
container traffic league. This is a good
example of the effect of a natural
catastrophe on a port and the ability of
good management to overcome such
disaster.
Fundamental

Observations
Concerning Ports
— Ports tend to be large civil
engineering undertakings with
huge sunk costs. They also tend
to last much longer than the
vehicles that use them. If a
shipowner makes a mistake in
the type or size of ship he buys
he can usually recoup his losses
by selling his mistake. A port
manager will usually find it more
difficult and costly to dispose of
his mistakes.

— A ship is an entity, whereas a
port is simply a collection of
activities. This makes it more
difficult to talk about ports in
general. A small ship has many
technical and operational
features in common with a large
ship but it is sometimes difficult
to see what a small fishing port
in a developing country has in
common with, say, Rotterdam.
— Most ships and ship operators
are international in their design
and ways of working, whereas
ports tend to be more parochial
in that they reflect their local

commercial attitudes, practices,
laws and working practices. The
duties of, say, the ship’s captain
are similar regardless of flag,
whereas the duties of the port
harbourmaster can differ
considerably between countries.
— Since the advent of
intermodalism, ports now have
to compete for cargo very much
more than in the past—hence the
great interest in increasing port
efficiency and value-added
activities over the last few years.
(Value-added activities are
described by UNCTAD as

—“The term added value
signifies value newly added or
created in the productive process
of an enterprise. Loading and
discharging are certainly value-
adding activities, so are the
industrial services of a port
noted earlier. In a distribution
centre, added value can take
different forms such as cargo-
consolidation and
deconsolidation—providing up-
to-date information on the
inventory and cargo movements,
stuffing/unstuffing containers,
crating, palletisation, shrink-

wrapping, labelling, weighing,
repackaging, etc.”)
— Ports provide an economic
multiplier for a region and many
ports now carry out Economic
Impact Studies to determine
which aspects of their work
should be encouraged. It should
also be remembered that ports
are not only “gateways” for
cargo but also obvious sites for
industry, banks, agents, storage
depots and distribution centres.
They have in addition been large
employers of labour.
— Ports are also an important part

of a nation’s transport
infrastructure and must be part of
national transport planning,
which is why any national
government or local government
will wish to have some input into
the general port strategic
planning.
— Up to the mid-nineteenth century
ships were small and could
approach most creeks and
estuaries. Since then they have
grown steadily until the 1950s,
after which ship size increased
rapidly. This increase in size
created problems for most ports,

particularly as regards water
depth, the width of dock
entrances and berth length. Many
terminals became obsolete.
— The increase in ship size caused
changes in trading patterns in
order to gain the advantages of
economies of scale. Large ships
must trade between large ports,
with ample deep water, leaving
smaller ships (feeder vessels) to
distribute the cargo to smaller
ports. Ships used to go to the
cargo—now cargo goes to the
ship. These large ports are now
referred to as centre ports and

the trading pattern as hub and
spoke. It is also important to note
that it is the large powerful liner
shipowners who ultimately
decide whether or not a port
becomes a centre port, not the
port management. The port
management can however create
a milieu that is attractive to the
big multinational container
carriers.
The Main Functions

and Features of a Port
Civil engineering features
— Sea and land access.
— Infrastructures for ships
berthing.
— Road and rail network.
— Industrial area management.
Administrative functions
— Control of vehicles, all modes,

entering and leaving the port.
— Environmental control.
— Control of dangerous cargo.
— Safety and security within the
port area.
— Immigration, health, customs and
commercial documentary
control.
Operational functions
— Pilotage, tugging and mooring
activities.
— Use of berths, sheds, etc.
— Loading, discharging, storage

and distribution of cargo.
Main Facilities and
Services Provided by a
Port
Services and
Facilities for
Ships
Services and
Facilities for Cargo
Arrival and
departure
Basic
Navigation aids
and VTS
Cargo handling on
ship and on quay

Approach channel Transport to/from
storage
Pilotage, tugs and
mooring gangs
Storage/warehousing
Locks (if tidal)
Tallying, marking,
weighing, surveying
Berths
Surveillance,
protection, sanitary
measures
Administrative
formalities
Dangerous cargo
segregation
Police,
immigration,
customs, health
Customs and
documentary control
Supplies, water,
bunkers
Receiving and
delivery
Telephone, Additional "added

repairs, medical,
waste disposal
value" services
Port state control
Repackaging,
labelling, sorting,
assembling
Cargo transfer
Cleaning and
preparing cargo
Opening/closing
of hatches
Setting up a logistic
network
Breaking
out/stowing
Setting up a
marketing package
One of the important points to be
underlined on reading through these lists
of functions, features, facilities and
services that exist within most ports, is
the breadth and variety of skills and

activities that are taking place, bearing
in mind the preceding list only contains
the more important and significant
factors.
Some Definitions
Operational definitions
Port. A town with a harbour and
facilities for a ship/shore interface and
customs facilities.
Harbour. A shelter, either natural or

artificial, for ships.
Dock. An artificially constructed
shelter for shipping.
Lock. In tidal waters the majority of
docks have been maintained at a fixed
depth of water by making the access to
them through a lock, which allows the
ship to be raised or lowered as it enters
or leaves the dock.
The advantages are:
1. A constant depth of water can
be maintained.
2. Cargo handling between ship
and shore is easier.
3. The ship’s mooring lines do not

need constant attention.
The disadvantages are:
1. Increase in capital cost. It is
also a constructional feature
difficult to alter if changes in
ship design make it too short or
narrow. This has been a
problem with many ageing ports
in tidal waters.
2. Extra time and possible delays
for the ship when arriving and
leaving.
Breakwater or Mole. A long solid
structure, built on the seaward side of

the harbour, for protection against the
weather, rough seas and swell.
Wharf. A structure built along the
shore where vessels can berth alongside.
Pier or Jetty. A structure built out from
the shore or river bank on masonry, steel
or wooden piles for berthing ships. It is
not a solid structure and should not
greatly impede the flow of tide or
current. However both these terms are
often used with considerable variations.
Dolphin. An isolated islet of piles or
masonry to assist in the berthing or
manoeuvring of ships.
Stevedore. A person employed in
moving the cargo on or off the ship. This

is again a term with many local
variations. For instance, in London it
was the term for one of the skilled team
who stowed the cargo on board the ship
but after Lord Devlin’s report the many
traditional functional terms used in this
area were abandoned in favour of the
all-embracing term “docker”.
Tug. A small power-driven vessel
used in ports and harbours to:
— Tow barges and other
unpowered craft between
required locations within the
harbour. In the early days of sail
they were among the first steam

vessels to be developed as they
were very useful in helping
sailing craft in and out of port.
— Help large vessels to manoeuvre
in and out of locks and on and off
their berths.
— Help in salvage and rescue
situations. Many will be
equipped with fire fighting and
pollution control equipment.
A modern harbour tug will probably
have a bollard pull of somewhere
between 20 to 70 tons.

Legal definitions
Port means an area within which
ships are loaded with and/or discharged
of cargo and includes the usual places
where ships wait for their turn or are
ordered or obliged to wait for their turn
no matter the distance from that area.
If the word port is not used, but the
port is (or is to be) identified by its
name, this definition shall still apply.
Safe Port (see Chapter four) means a
port which, during the relevant period of
time, the ship can reach, enter, remain at
and depart from without, in the absence
of some abnormal occurrence, being

exposed to danger which cannot be
avoided by good navigation and
seamanship.
Berth means the specific place where
the ship is to load and/or discharge. If
the word berth is not used, but the
specific place is (or is to be) identified
by its name, this definition shall still
apply.
Safe Berth means a berth which,
during the relevant period of time, the
ship can reach, remain at and depart
from without, in the absence of some
abnormal occurrence, being exposed to
danger which cannot be avoided by good
navigation and seamanship.

Different Types of
Port
Ports can be classified in two large
groups—by function and by geographic
type:
By function
(A) A cargo interface
1. Hub or Centre port, also

sometimes referred to as a
mega port, direct-call port, hub
and load centre port, megahub
(greater than 4mn TEUs per
annum where a TEU = Twenty-
foot Equivalent Unit), superhub
(greater than 1 million TEUs
per annum), load centre port,
pivot port, etc. The variations
are almost endless but different
authors can use them with
subtle variations. (See comment
at end of section.)
In the past ports tended to be either
simply large major ports dealing with

international trade or smaller local ports
serving the needs of their own hinterland
with mainly coastal or short-sea
shipping. As inland transport developed
larger ports became larger and smaller
ports smaller. The advent of intermodal
transport and larger ships meant a
change in the economics of international
transport. Cargo began to move by
feeder ships or inland transport modes to
large hub or centre ports where large
fast container ships moved the
containers to other strategically located
hub ports around the world.
The concept of hub ports has
developed since it was first introduced a

couple of decades ago. Originally the
general consensus seemed to be that the
hub port would naturally be formed by
the largest container port in the region or
the port for which ships had the most
cargo. The idea of creating a major hub
port which was neither the origin or
destination of any cargo would have
been firmly squashed, as it was in the
case of Falmouth in the early 1980s.
However, ideas are changing, and we
are now seeing hubs located at an
intermediate point along a pendulum
route with zero local cargo to offer, e.g.
Malta (Marsaxlokk), Freeport Bahamas
and Salalah. Such ports as these tend to

be interchange ports for large vessels
rather than hub and spoke ports for large
vessels and feeders.
According to an H. P. Drewry Report
in 1997, 78% of container throughput at
the Port of Singapore in 1996 consisted
of trans-shipment containers, while at
Algeciras it was 90%. The same report
estimated that two-thirds of the rise at
the 20 major hub ports was not due to
global traffic growth but caused by an
increase in trans-shipment. It was also
estimated that between 1980 and 1990
the number of trans-shipment containers
had been growing at an average of 14%
per annum. In 2003 it was estimated that

82% of all containers are trans-shipped.
When considering the economics of
hub and spoke feeder services one
should remember that in the late 1990s
the minimum terminal handling cost per
trans-shipment container was probably
be in the region of US$500.
As the large international liner
companies are the major decision-
makers when it comes to designating a
hub port, they will not want one port to
achieve monopoly status in a region.
One would anticipate therefore that they
will endeavour to ensure that at least
two ports of hub port status are
competing in a region to safeguard their

bargaining position.
Relationship between total
cost of direct-call and feeder
alternatives
One of the major points of discussion
concerning ports is whether this division
of ports into centre ports and feeder
ports will continue indefinitely. It may
be that it is a passing phase of
development in the early stages of the
growth of containerisation, together with
unbalanced global trade at the end of the

twentieth century. If the volume of trade
is large enough, distribution via feeder
vessels is obviously not the optimum
solution. On the one hand, trading
between centre ports enables the carrier
to take advantage of the economies of
scale offered by large container ships.
On the other hand, there are the extra
costs and potential delays caused by
having to re-ship the containers on to a
smaller feeder ship for distribution. The
volume of traffic therefore becomes the
decisive factor. The volume in this
context is, for a particular port, the
number of obtainable TEUs per week by
a shipping line in relation to a specified

maritime route. Thus a shipping line
should use feeder services as long as the
traffic at its disposal on a maritime route
is fewer than “x”TEUs per week (both
import and export). Professor Shuo Ma
suggested in the early 1990s that
between an Asian and a European port x
= 580.
A case study of a possible new
hub/centre port
The town of Sines, in the south of
Portugal, is quite small but has a long
history as a fishing port with a small

general cargo terminal. It was the birth
place of Vasco de Gama. Over the last
few years it has taken advantage of its
deep water to develop as a tanker
terminal but its small hinterland and
relatively poor inland transport
connections had, before around 1997,
made the port management of Sines not
sure whether the port could make any
major development into containerisation.
However, with the increasing success of
the new generation of hub ports on
pendulum routes, the port of Sines
reassessed its potential. In June 1999, a
concession was given to PSA to run a
deep-water container terminal which

opened in 2003 with 320 metres of quay.
The port of Sines has:
— An excellent geographical
position. In fact, it is virtually on
the point where the main
shipping routes to and from Asia,
Africa and the Americas
converge on north-western
Europe.
— Deep water approaches and
terminals.
— Room to expand.
— An enthusiastic and competent
management.
Another good example of a newly

developed hub port is Gioia Tauro. It is
situated in southern Italy and handled its
first container in August 1995. The port
of Gioia Tauro did not start as a
container terminal. In 1975, the Italian
Government decided to develop a steel
industry in the south of Italy with the
purpose of creating new jobs and
activities. However, the European steel
crises in 1992 destroyed any potential
success for the steel industry and
therefore, for the project. The project
was scrapped until the Contship Italian
group, a container sea carrier and
terminal operator, had the idea of
transforming the harbour into a

transhipment hub. In 1995, the
(medcenter container terminal (mct)),
created by Contship Italian group, began
to operate. Nowadays the terminal is
controlled by Contship Italian group (a
holding company which in turn is
controlled by Eurokai (66.6%), Eurogate
(33.4%) and Maersk Sealand (10%)).
In 1999 and after just four years in the
market, Gioia Tauro became the busiest
port in the Mediterranean handling 2.3
million TEUs (Containerisation
International Yearbook 2001). In 2005,
Gioia Tauro reached 3.2 million TEUs,
of which 95% was trans-shipment traffic
as its local cargo is almost irrelevant.

The port entrance is 250m wide with a
water depth of 20m, while the port
channel has a minimum width of 200m.
The medcenter terminal provides a
3,145m linear berth with a maximum
draught of 15.5m. It is equipped with the
most up-to-date technologies which
allow the mooring and the efficient
(un)loading of several ships of the size
of Sovereign Maersk (8,400 TEUs) and
give a total port annual capacity of 5.5
million TEUs. In the terminal a
dedicated rail station has operated from
1999 that allows the movement of
containers outside the port via inland. In
the last years a new berth has been built

with a maximum draught of 18m.
The port of Sepetiba, which is
situated on the Brazilian coast between
Rio de Janeiro and Santos, was reported
in the maritime press in April 1998 to
have plans to be a major hub for the east
coast of South America.
In February 2003 Lloyd’s List
reported a possible new $390m project
for a new deepwater Tangier-Med. Port,
while at Christmas 2004, Panama
announced plans for a new mega port to
be developed at the Pacific end of the
proposed enlarged canal.
(2) Feeder port—to feed and

distribute cargo from 1.
(3) Entrepot or transit port.
(4) Domestic port, i.e. a natural
outlet for surrounding hinterland.
(B) A MIDAS (Maritime
Industrial Development Area)
(also known in France as
Zones Industrielles
Portuaires (ZIP))
This was a term that became part of port
jargon in the mid-1960s to cover the port
development which had been taking

place gradually since the Second World
War. Industries such as petrochemicals,
oil refineries, steel works saw the
advantages of locating themselves in
port areas to take advantage of cheap
transport of bulk raw materials. For this
to occur there had to be deep-water
access, available land and demand for
the product. A MIDAS can be one or
more of the following:
(5) Large industrial zone with its
own marine transport terminal.
(6) Customs free port.
(7) Oil port.

(C) Specific ship/shore
interface
(8) Naval port.
(9) Fishing port.
(10) Specific Commodity Export
Port, for example (quoting 2000
tonnages) Coal—Qinhuangdao
(China) 83.8 million tonnes,
Richards Bay (South Africa)
68.9 million tonnes, Hay Point
(Australia) 69.4 million tonnes,
Port of Virginia (USA) 20.3
million tonnes.
Iron Ore—Tubarao Praia, Mole
(Brazil) 68.3 million tonnes, Port

Headland (Australia) 68.5
million tonnes, Dampier
(Australia) 65.9 million tonnes,
Saldanha Bay (South Africa) 24
million tonnes, Narvik (Norway)
11.8 million tonnes.
A large port such as Rotterdam can be
many of these.
By geographic type
This classification is almost endless, so
only the more important types are
considered here.

(1) Coastal submergence—New
York and Southampton.
(2) Ryas (submerged estuaries)—
Falmouth, Rio.
(3) Tidal estuaries—Bristol,
London, Antwerp.
(4) Artificial harbours—Dover.
(5) Rivers (non-tidal)—Montreal.
The recognition of a geographic type
may give an insight into its operating
advantages or disadvantages, e.g. a tidal
estuarial port will probably require
more expensive surveying and dredging
than a closed dock system.
The port of London is a good example

of an estuarial port. Note that the ports
on the Medway are under a different
authority. The Port of London also
illustrates the process described in
Chapter two of how, as ports develop,
their centres of operation tend to move
towards the sea. It started in Roman
times at London Bridge and would have
moved to the Maplin Sands in the 1970s
if the port management had had its way.
Note also the sheer size of the port and
the diversity of activities that take place
within its boundaries.

Figure 1: The Port of London
Information about
Ports

Most large ports will of course have
their own web page on the internet and
there are several comprehensive
reference books on world ports.
However, over the last five years or so
Fairplay has compiled this information
on a computer disk and it is available
both in the Fairplay World Shipping
Encyclopaedia and on the disc called
World Ports. By being available in disc
form the information is not only easier
and cheaper to send around the world
and be kept up to date, but the search
facilities enable the user to easily find
and select the data that is really needed.
The information on each port includes a

complete port description with charts
and photographs (the latter only on the
World Ports disc), pre-arrival
information for ships, navigational
considerations, information on berths,
cargoes and port dues. It concludes with
a comprehensive list of general
information and addresses.
There is also a Guide to Port Entry
which is available on disc.
Conclusion
One must also remember that ports have

not developed simply as industrial and
commercial trading centres. They have
also been the points where foreign
cultures and ideas have impacted on a
nation. Shanghai, Bombay, Rio,
Liverpool and a hundred other great port
cities owe much of their flamboyant past
to their maritime connections. Large
modern ships with small crews, berthed
well away from populated zones no
longer create the dynamic if racy
waterfront areas so well described by
maritime authors of yore. Such traces as
are now left are being preserved as
tourist areas, such as the Nyhaven in
Copenhagen or the Reeperbahn in

Hamburg.
The conclusion to this first
introductory chapter is therefore that
ports as such are a very loose and
diverse concept. They are often more
than a transport interface and a focal
point of an area’s inland transport
infrastructure as they will invariably
involve a large capital investment, be a
regional economic multiplier and a large
employer of labour. All of this will
make them important pawns in the
political arena of the area. I hope that
this book will help to clarify the concept
of a port and give a clearer
understanding as to its function, purpose,

operation and possible future
development.

Chapter Two
Port Development
Introduction—phases of port
development—growth in world trade
—changes in growth—developments in
terminal operation
Introduction

Ports, like most other commercial
activities, are constantly changing. Their
design and infrastructure change as the
vehicles using them change and their
functions develop and alter as the trade
passing through them varies in type and
quantity. Cargo-handling technology and
changes in labour requirements and
culture have also seen radical
developments. In order to understand
ports and to try to develop a general
conceptual model for ports, it is
important to grasp the general pattern
and causes of these developments and
the solutions, good or bad, attempted by
various port managers. In London these

developments have been evolving over
2,000 years but other ports in other parts
of the world may have gone through the
same process in just a few decades. As
already stressed, if this process of
evolution can be analysed, then it will
be easier to forecast future changes
Phases of Port
Development

Figure 2: Factors constraining port
development
Many factors can cause ports to
change, evolve or die:
— Changes in the inland
transport infrastructure. For

instance, the coming of the
railways tended to make large
ports like London and Liverpool
larger and small ports smaller.
Road transport had the opposite
effect in the UK where the post-
Second World War motorways
saw a revival in many of the
country’s smaller ports. Many
would argue, however, that it
was not the motorway in itself
that attracted the shipowner to
the smaller ports, but that in the
smaller ports the labour unions
were less militant. However, the
development of large container

ships has again encouraged the
growth of large regional ports.
— Changes in trade patterns. The
UK joining the EU had a negative
effect on Liverpool but a
positive effect on Felixstowe as
the UK traded more with its EU
partners and less with the old
members of the Commonwealth.
Port analysts need to consider
carefully the effect which the
current trend of regional co-
operation in trade and industry
will have on port growth.
— Changes in financial and
logistical thinking. London at its

peak was an enormous
warehouse for Europe. Since the
Second World War the tendency
is not to store “things” but to use
ports as industrial areas, such as
Rotterdam. More recently the
trend has been to develop
“value-added activities” and
become a sophisticated
marketing and distribution
centre, such as, for example,
Hamburg or Bremen. Students
might like to discuss why London
apparently failed in this
development as compared with
Rotterdam.

— Length of life. Unlike ships,
ports often have to last a long
time, sometimes for centuries.
They therefore have to adapt and
change over the course of time.
Many of the traditional British
ports were developed and built
well over a century ago which
means that many are now faced
with a legacy of small antiquated
docks.
Growth in World

Trade
Figure 3: Growth in world seaborne trade
World trade has shown continuous
growth since reliable statistics began,
and Figure 3 indicates that there has
been a tremendous upsurge since the
1950s, when a more efficient and

productive system provided by
containerisation and bulk carriage was
evolved to meet the growing demand.
The table above, which tabulates the
major individual products that go to
make up world trade, indicates a
fluctuating demand over the last quarter
of a century for some commodities. As

the price of crude oil increased in the
early 1980s the demand for it reduced
slightly. Grain will always fluctuate
depending on the success or otherwise
of local harvests. From the above table
coal can be seen to have shown the most
successful growth.
In 1980 the percentage in general
cargo of world trade was 28%. In 2000
the world trade in general cargo was
981 million tonnes, of which 57.6% was
containerised. In 2005 this was 1,200
million tonnes of which 60% was
containerised.
The phenomenal growth of the
Chinese economy is effecting most of the

world’s trade routes. The port traffic
through Chinese ports has been
increasing at around 11% a year since
1998. In 2008 a reliable source reported
that China produced 90% of the world’s
toys and 60% of the apparel that is
bought, while in 2007 China imported
383 million tons of iron ore.
Figure 4: China dry bulk imports and
exports

For the purpose of measuring world
trade one can use the actual tonnes
carried or the tonne/miles involved. For
the purpose of gauging the impact of
world trade on shipping activity
tonne/miles is more relevant, but for
assessing the global impact on ports the
former would seem more useful.
The important question for port
management is what of the future?
Demand and personal consumption will
almost certainly increase—for example,
if India and China increase their energy
per capita to only half that of, say,
Europe or Japan the demand in this
sector will be tremendous.

However, how will this demand be
met? There are various scenarios:
— Will large bulk carriers continue
to carry raw material long
distances to be processed or will
it be processed nearer its
source? If so, will it effect the
type of ship and terminal
required?
— Will goods be moved, or will
the factories and know-how be

relocated, as the Japanese have
done with their car factories?
— In 2001 it was estimated that
there would be a 59% increase
in energy requirements by 2020.
Structural changes in logistics:
— Include greater flexibility rather
than achieving economies of
scale by spreading the fixed
costs.
— Larger product variety with a
shorter life scale.
— Higher insecurity and risk.
— Outsourcing of the production of
components, of transport and

warehousing.
Political factors affecting
world trade and port
development
World trade may grow naturally as a
consequence of growing industrial
activity and of all the other factors
which one can normally expect to form
part of a nation’s economic
development. Such economic growth can
be stimulated and controlled by national
and international policy measures such

as World Trade Organisation (WTO).
Further, ports may be either the natural
gateway through which this growth in
trade is channelled or they may be
developed, as Hong Kong and Shanghai
largely were in the last century, to create
access to a virtually new market. In
other words, a port may be developed
by trade or vice versa.
While political factors are causing
trade to grow, the port has usually no
serious problems except perhaps for
congestion if the growth is too fast and
unexpected. A more serious situation is
when political factors cause a massive
loss in trade passing through a port. For

instance, Hong Kong’s trade was
severely hit in 1950 when the United
Nations clamped its embargo upon trade
with communist China. It is much to
Hong Kong’s credit that it switched from
a port-based economy and turned itself
into one of the world’s great
manufacturers.
Rostock on the German Baltic coast
has suffered on more than one occasion
from political changes. Before the Iron
Curtain came down more than 60 years
ago it was the premier German seaport
in the Baltic. While in the GDR it built
up a large international breakbulk trade
of around 20 million tons. When the Iron

Curtain was lifted in 1990 its cargo
throughput dropped to 8 million tons per
annum as the breakbulk cargo moved to
better equipped and positioned Western
ports. However, by 1996 its annual
throughput was up to 18 million tons, but
this time by catering for the North South
Ro/Ro trade across the Baltic. This
latest development should continue,
greatly helped by the parallel
development of better road and rail
connections.
There could be a possible
development of regionalisation, as the
EU produces more local trading in
favour of international trading.

A paper produced in 2001 suggested
that in a decade the number of hub ports
could be reduced from 6,000 to 100–
200.
Figure 5: The extended Porter Diamond

applied to seaports (adapted from
Haezendonck, 2002)
Porter’s Diamond is a mutually
reinforcing system, whose determinants
are co-related in creating a competitive
advantage of an industry. The individual
determinants are mutually dependent
because the effect of one of them
depends on the state of the other. Porter
(1990) also named two additional
determinants that can influence the
success of a firm and complete the
system. These are chance and
government.
Factor conditions are basically

factors of production: labour; land;
natural resources; capital; and
infrastructure. However, the factors that
are most crucial to competitive
advantage in most industries are not
inherited but are created within a nation,
like technological know-how.
Swot analysis (strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities
and threats)
A swot analysis is a useful way of
assessing the potential development

concerning a port’s competitive edge
and threats from rival ports in the area.
The elements to be considered in such an
analysis will vary but such a list should
include:
— Maritime accessibility, depth
available and position on major
trade routes.
— Amount of trans-shipment cargo
it can attract and storage space
and facilities.
— Logistics that provide value-
added and available
manufacturing industries.
— Activities of transport agencies

and goods and rail distribution
networks.
— Good well trained labour force
and efficient servicing
companies.
— Technology and communication
systems.
— State of internal and external
competition.
— Ability of port authority and
political administrations.
— Costs.
Some other “wildcards” that
can effect growth

Labour—for instance, the port of
Colombo having turned itself into a
transit port in the early 1980s had moved
up the container port league table from
75th position in 1983 to 26th position in
1988. However, labour unrest (which
often follows success) in the late 1980s
caused a major container line customer
to pull out, and it was 1996 before the
port was able to regain a similar rating
in the world port container league.
Exceptional bad weather—has also
damaged many ports, many of which
have been under-insured and been
unable to find the necessary capital to
make good the damage.

Changes in cargo-moving technology
—for instance, in the 1970s some ports
made large capital investments in
terminals for the handling of LNG only
to find a change of policy in some areas
to move the commodity by pipeline
Why some ports become
major ports
In 1995 20 ports handled 52% of the
world’s terminal throughput. There are
two main requirements for a port to
achieve success:

1. A good natural harbour and
deep water approaches, i.e. site
considerations. For example,
with Rotterdam, as with most
large river deltas, silting was a
major problem and the
direction of the channels was
constantly changing. To try to
stabilise the situation a canal
was cut in 1830. This attempt
did not succeed but in 1870 the
New Waterway was
constructed to provide a direct
outlet to the sea. This was
successful and formed the basis
of the modern port of

Rotterdam. Amsterdam had an
even greater problem when
after the Second World War it
lost the sea altogether when the
Zuider Zee was reclaimed.
2. A strong traffic-generating
location, i.e. the port must be
central to an area and on the
way to a meaningful
destination.
The above two factors can be enhanced
by human, corporate and government
contrivance.

Growth of the world’s leading
ports
Many historians consider Bruges to have
been the leading port in northern Europe
in the thirteenth century. This title passed
in the fifteenth century to Antwerp until
the Spanish invasion and the closure of
the Scheldt in 1585. After this the mantle
was worn by Amsterdam for perhaps a
century, before being claimed by
London, when industrial capitalism
assumed more significance than
mercantile capitalism. The table below
shows how the port which could claim
to be the world’s largest port has

altered. In 2001 the Port of Tanjung
Pelepas (PTP) was the fastest growing
port.
There are many different ways port
size can be compared, such as the
physical area, the length of waterfront,
the value of cargo passing through the

port, number and/or tonnage of vessels
calling, etc.
However, as a crude indicator of size,
the total cargo throughput of the port is
the statistic preferred by most people
working in the port industry. Bulk
cargoes do form a very large proportion
of the total in all cases, particularly with
the leading ports.
The table above indicates how the
size of the ports shown has altered. All
have grown but some have grown more
and faster than others. In most cases the
figures could be challenged as regards
their precision and consistency of
methodology, and what has been

included and excluded. For instance,
until recently London figures used to
include several million tons of sludge
which were shipped out to the North Sea
for dumping. However, the trends should
be sufficiently accurate to allow general
conclusions to be made.
The table also shows that over the last
century the majority of the world’s
largest ports were in the Atlantic basin,
but in 1995 Singapore appeared in the
statistical tables as the world’s largest
port and the latest world league tables
show that the Pacific basin can now
claim this honour.
Singapore’s growth in the last decade

has been truly phenomenal. However, in
2005 Shanghai showed an even greater
phenomenal growth when it moved into
the lead position with an annual
throughput of 443 million metric tons
with Singapore on 423 freight tons and
Rotterdam on 370.6 million metric tons.
In 2005 Rotterdam announced a new
development called Maasvlakte2 which
will involve a massive reclamation
project which it hopes to start in 2008.
Changes in Growth

From the table on page 19 comparing
London and New York it can be
estimated that New York finally draws
well clear of London about 1915 after
the start of the First World War. This
same conclusion would seem to be
arrived at no matter whether one uses
values or tonnages. This was rather sad
from the British point of view as London
had long been proud of its claim to be
the world’s greatest port, so proud in
fact that it continued to make this claim
though the 1920s and 1930s. London did,
however, continue to grow, though
considerably more slowly than its rivals,
and reached its zenith with regard to

tonnage in 1964 when it peaked at over
60 million tons. It must be underlined
that these tables and graphs are
considering only the size of ports.
London can still lay claim to be the
world’s premier maritime commercial
centre.
The same table shows how, in the late
1960s, New York passed the largest-port
baton onto Rotterdam which had
continued to grow at a phenomenal
speed following the Second World War.
Like London before it, New York was
proud of its leading position and in the
1997 Guinness Book of Records it was
still listed as the world’s greatest port.

Leading ports for specific
cargoes
Ports can, of course, be classified by
size with reference to specific activities
or cargoes. Miami claims, for instance,
to be the biggest when it comes to cruise
shipping and in the various shipping
trades claims are made that a port is the
largest fishing port, coal export port, etc.
However, within the containerised
shipping trade, league tables are
published annually by Containerisation
International and these are copied into
numerous publications.
See also the section on the “Rise and

Fall of Ports” in Chapter 5.
The physical development of
a major port
This table is based on Professor Bird’s
summary given in his book Major
Seaports in the UK and its purpose is to
show the general physical stages most
ports have passed through.
Era Comments
The ships approach
chosen discharge points
as closely as possible,

1 Primitive
lying aground if
necessary. A port grows
around this point. In
London this point would
have been just below Old
London Bridge. Professor
Bird says that this era
comes to an end when
demand causes this basic
nucleus to expand or
relocate itself. He
suggests that in London
this happened around ad
200.
2
Marginal
Quay
Extension
There is now a series of
purpose-built quay walls
for ships to berth at. In
London this was the

system until the end of the
ninth century.
3
Marginal
Quay
Elaboration
Number of berths
extended by artificial
embayments. In London
this appears to have
happened at Queenhithe in
899.
4
Dock
Elaboration
Artificial docks
constructed with tidal
basins and complicated
quay patterns. In London
this started in 1802 with
the opening of the West
India Dock. It is
interesting that very many
of the traditional ports
arrived at this point about

the same time. Liverpool
was the first in the UK in
1712.
5
Simple
Lineal
Quayage
Long straight quays in
docks purpose-built for
the large steel steamships.
These docks may be
located in places more
suitable for the ships. In
London this can be seen in
the building of the Royal
Docks and Tilbury Docks.
6
Specialised
Quayage
Quays and jetties built in
specific areas to
accommodate large
tankers such as VLCCs,
and specific cargoes.
Specialised container and

Ro/Ro berths could be
considered in this
category.
The dates given for London are
mentioned only for interest. The
important fact to recognise is the general
evolutionary process. Los Angeles, for
instance, went through the whole process
in about a century and a half.
The reasons why London is chosen as
an example frequently throughout this
book are:
1. It is universally well known
and has been reasonably well

researched.
2. There are many older ports,
such as Alexandria, but
probably few where the
development can be traced on
such a continuous and
consistent basis.
Developments in port location
Figure 6 (on page 22) represents a
simple “model” port which shows how
many estuarial ports have developed.
Originally the ships approached as far
upriver as possible and were generally

forced to stop where the first bridge had
been built. This was usually no problem
as the bridge marked a main
thoroughfare and a large trading city had
probably developed there.
Figure 6: A “model” port (see Professor J.
Bird’s Major Seaports of the UK)

In the case of London, the Romans
built the bridge and developed the city
of London. The ships would anchor or
berth below the bridge and discharge.
By the beginning of the nineteenth
century the river had become congested
by ships and much of the cargo was
being stolen. (The London River Police
were the city’s first police force.) To
ease congestion and increase security
various docks were built along the river.
As ships got bigger with deeper drafts,
the new docks and terminals moved
down-river to the sea. In London by the
1870s Tilbury docks were built, 35
miles down-river from the city. With the

advent of containerisation and faster
cargo-handling, more terminal space
was needed as well as good access to
inland transport systems so old terminals
were closed and new ones constructed.
In the 1970s the Port of London
Authority had plans to develop a new
port system right at the mouth of the
Thames on Maplin Sands but this plan
hit several problems, some of them
environmental (it would have meant
destroying an important bird sanctuary)
so the plans were shelved.
Some elements of the process
indicated by the model can in fact be
observed in most ports that have not

been lucky enough to be built on a virgin
site within the last three decades. Dubai
is an interesting variation, as there in a
creek can be seen sailing vessels
berthed and trading in a manner
seemingly untouched by the passing of
time, while almost alongside lies a new
state-of-the-art container port.
Financing port development
Since an old established port often
owned land in the old city centre, now
very desirable for development as high
rent offices, many ports have been able

to fund their new projects by skilfully
developing their redundant port sites.
Good land management has therefore
become an essential management
function for many of the traditional port
administrations. One can see good
examples of this in London, New York,
Copenhagen, Hamburg, Antwerp, etc.,
where old warehouses have been
converted to trendy luxury hotels, office
blocks, shopping malls or apartment
areas.
A relatively new development in port
financing and control is the growing
practice of large powerful ports, such as
the ports of Singapore and Hamburg,

investing their profits and skills in new
port development in other parts of the
world. Large shipping groups have also
been involved in port investment.
Developments caused by
changing customs procedures
In 1803 in London a law was passed
allowing ships to discharge to customs
warehouses. This is a very significant
date as it meant that until this time the
ship was virtually the warehouse, and
the consignee had to collect the cargo
from the ship. So before this time

merchant warehouses were often outside
the docks. Communication was very
limited, so a ship’s arrival could seldom
be anticipated with any precision.
Consignees had to wait until the Master
notified them that the ship had arrived
and where she was berthed. Even
towards the end of the 1800s in the UK,
sailing ships had to give shippers three
days’ notice before working cargo, to
allow them time to make arrangements
for collecting or delivering the cargo.
This very significant change in
customs procedure affected the whole
concept of port cargo-handling and
terminal design. Even today in many

developing countries the customs
procedures can be the major cause of
low productivity.
Developments in
Terminal Operation
The dates and modes of operation given
in the following section are only
indications of the methods employed in
many major ports about that time. The
descriptions are largely based on
London, which until 1908 was really a

collection of private unregulated
terminals. Thus at any one time the
practices adopted at one terminal or
dock were often quite different to those
practised at other terminals in the
vicinity. However, the importance of
locating precisely when things happened
is not so important as identifying why the
changes occurred.
The period before 1800
Prior to 1800 port operation had
remained in general unchanged for
centuries. The standard ship around

1800 was in the region of 300 tons and
was of course sail-powered. Most ports
would have quays or wharves. (By 1805
26 miles of vaults existed in London for
wine storage.)
Cargoes were usually loaded and
discharged on and off the ship by the
crew, though the Master or agent could
employ extra labour if they needed or
wished to. The cargo would be handled
manually, though tackle often seems to
have been used to lift the cargo
vertically out of the hold onto the ship’s
deck. John Pudney in his book London
Docks says that towards the end of the
1700s the London watermen opposed the

use of cranes. These were of course
hand-operated cranes as hydraulic and
steam cranes were still in their
theoretical or experimental stage.
However, although this had not been a
dynamic period of changes for ports,
efforts to improve port facilities were
beginning. For instance, in 1780 Hull
Dock Company developed a 2-
horsepower operated dredger capable of
shifting 22 tons per hour.
1800–1850
During this period the tonnage entering

the Port of London more than doubled
over the previous century. The industrial
revolution was under way, and by 1840
the UK had a national railway system. In
the UK the railways were one of the
major forces in port development,
making large ports larger and small
ports smaller. For ports exporting coal
during this century, and the UK was one
of the world’s largest coal suppliers,
their rise or fall was almost entirely in
the hands of the private railway
companies.
Unfortunately, the introduction of the
steamship during this introductory
period caused problems for the dock

designer. Gordon Jackson in his book
History and Archaeology of Ports
makes the point that steamers could not
be crowded into a dock. A dock for 140
sailing ships would take only 35
steamers. Jackson also notes that:
“The aversion to dockside warehouses that
had been growing since the 1840s became,
as far as is known, universal, with new
docks favouring one and two-storey transit
sheds, often with built in gantry cranes, and
with more emphasis than hitherto on open
spaces for the handling of minerals and
machinery. There was a growing tendency
for goods to be stored outside the docks.
Railways and docks were increasingly
interdependent. However, in London and

many other ports ships discharged directly
into barges which lay alongside—some
docks had a width problem.”
The dockside warehouse did remain at
many terminals until the end of the
nineteenth century and the evolution of
the transit shed was in many places
slow.
During this period steamships
appeared, though they could only be
used for short distance and coastal
traffic because the engines were
inefficient and their coal consumption
considerable. However, in 1818 the
Savannah was the first auxiliary ship to
cross the Atlantic and by 1837 the

steamships Great Western and Sirius did
establish a regular trans-Atlantic
service. In 1850 steamers formed 41%
of foreign-going ships arriving at Hull,
but only 28% of those arriving at
London. Therefore, the sailing ships
were still the predominant commercial
long-distance carrier. Anticipating the
approaching threat from the steamship,
sailing ships were however improving
their speed and efficiency.
By 1850 the average sailing ship size
was 210 tons and the average size
steamship was 250 tons.

1850–1900
Figure 7: Layout for a typical berth (1850–
1900)
Figure 7 above illustrates a possible
layout for a typical berth during this
period. The ship discharged her cargo
on to the wharf or into a barge. The
warehouse probably had cranes fitted to

her walls to lift the cargo to the required
floor. Cargo movement on the wharf or
in the warehouse would be by hand truck
and distribution to and from warehouse
would be by horse and cart or railway.
During the second half of the century
the tonnage of ships arriving in London
increased by over 12 times that of the
first half. So this was obviously a period
of rapid expansion for London. Not only
was world trade growing fast, but the
railways made London the transport
focal point of Britain and also, to use
modern jargon, it became the centre port
for Europe. This was almost certainly
helped by its political and financial

stability compared to most of its
European rivals, and its empire trade.
In 1888 the Report from the Select
Committee on Sweating gives a
complete insight into the operational
working of the London Docks for that
moment in time, with employers, union
officials and dock workers being cross-
examined about the working practices of
the moment. Most seem to take
mechanisation (cranes) for granted in the
docks (though not on the smaller river
wharves) and some made wistful
comments about how good it was 15 or
so years ago before the cranes brought
unemployment and lower wages into the

docks. When asked what had made the
greatest changes in the docks, two of the
senior employers said the Suez Canal,
which they blamed for increasing the
competition from the continent, and the
telegraph which greatly facilitated
communication over large areas within
the port. It was also noted that the
improvement in international
communication had reduced the amount
of speculative importing and storage in
the London warehouses. (Is this the first
indication of “just in time”?) Comments
were also made concerning the growth
in the number of steam tugs which had
done much to even out the ship arrivals,

hitherto so dependent on the wind to
manoeuvre upriver. The growth in
steamships was also noted as well as the
fact that they were nearly all geared and
needed little extra equipment to work
cargo. Sailing vessels on the other hand
were seldom at berths with cranes and
would often need a barge with a
portable steam winch and boiler.
1900–1960
By the early 1900s, the port had reached
a stage of development that is easily
recognisable even today. From then until

the greater utilisation of dry bulk
cargoes in the 1950s and the onset of
unitisation in the 1960s, its development
was one of gradual evolution as it
adapted to increases in ship size and the
steady improvement in cargo-handling
technology. In 1913 a survey comparing
major world ports rated Hamburg as the
best equipped port in the world and
New York one of the worst. In spite of
this, New York was rated the best as
regards ship turn-round times, because
the labour force worked at high speed at
all hours. This illustrates even at this
point how labour-intensive ports were
and how labour-dependent for their

productivity. This probably remains true
and will continue to be the most
important factor in productivity as long
as this “traditional” type of break-bulk
general cargo terminal remains in
existence.
In the UK, London and Liverpool
were established as the major ports. In
1913 London handled 29.3% of the
national trade and Liverpool 26%. By
1920 road haulage had arrived but it
was not perhaps until after the Second
World War and the building of the
motorways that road transport started to
reverse the effect the railways had had a
century before, and in the UK made the

small ports bigger and big ports smaller.
The devastation of the Second World
War gave many continental ports that
rare opportunity offered to port
management, that is “to start again”. This
new start combined with a new surge in
growth in ship size, improved transport
and commercial communications and a
steep post-war rise in demand for raw
materials, gave rise to a change in the
basic port function. The storage and
warehousing function decreased but the
port as an area of industrial activity
increased. In Rotterdam, for instance, the
south bank of the waterway was covered
in two swift stages to become 50

kilometres of heavy industry with access
by large bulk carriers.
To illustrate the evolution in this
period figures for a typical break-bulk
general cargo terminal for 1900, 1920
and 1960 are shown for comparison.

Figure 8: Typical break-bulk general cargo
terminals (1900, 1920, 1960)
In the 1960s dock transit sheds were
about 500ft by 120ft. They originally had
low roofs, but fork lift trucks could now
stack high easily and cheaply, therefore
sheds were now built with higher roofs.
A new era for dry cargo
shipping and ports
From about the mid-1960s it could be
argued that ports and shipping were
entering a new phase of operation. The

“traditional” cargo ships continued in
operation but were in decline and would
continue to be marginalised to the lesser
ports of the world with less lucrative
cargoes, in the same way that sailing
ships had been a century earlier.
General cargo moved to container
ships, and bulk cargo to bulk carriers.
Both ship types grew rapidly and
considerably in size as ports found the
water to match their draft and the cargo-
handling technology to maintain a rapid
turn-round in port. In addition to these
major new ship types, many new
specialist types emerged such as:

1965
PCCs (pure car carriers) and
PCTCs (pure car and truck
carriers). These require the port
to have large parking facilities
and their large "windage" may
cause berthing problems.
1970s
Introduction of barge-carrying
ships such as Lash and Seabees.
Originally it was thought that
these ships could manage with
little or no terminal facilities. In
fact some special terminals were
developed for them. Because of
their very sophisticated barge-
lifting gear there were also
occasional labour problems in
ports as to who had the "right" to
operate them.

1976 First semi-submersible.
1985
First fruit juice carrier. These
ships do, of course, require
specialist terminal facilities.
The container age
Figure 9: Growth in world container tonnage

Figure 9, showing the growth in the
world container traffic, illustrates that
although the global growth has been
consistently increasing the growth has
varied in the three main trading regions.
In 2000 world container ports
handling increased by 8.7% but in south-
east Asia and South America the growth
would be nearer 25%. Note that some
17% of container traffic is in empty
containers. It was estimated that the cost
of repositioning empties in 2000 was
around US$15 billion.
Development of unitisation

This started between the developed
countries in the late 1960s (in Australia
and USA perhaps a decade earlier) but
very often with only makeshift ships and
hurriedly converted terminals. The
pioneering spirit behind this
development was a truck operator, not a
shipowner.
By the mid-1970s, containers were
moving to developing countries in self-
sustaining vessels and although cranes
were not needed at the port, the lack of
facilities for the final inland transport
leg led to many problems. By 1980 the
second generation of container vessels
was now well established and the

concept of a well-developed container
terminal became better defined.
However, ships continued to grow and
by the late 1980s there were the fourth
generation ships which required larger
gantry cranes to reach across them. New
container sizes were also introduced and
all these changes required large capital
investment which for developing
countries meant further difficulties.
Containers brought with them other
problems for port operators:
— The large investment necessary
to containerise a route meant that
liner shipowners had to form

themselves into larger financial
units and hence were more
powerful customers from the
point of view of the port.
— The increase in size and
complexity of ships meant an
increase in the cost of the ship’s
time. Also the cargo was now
intermodal so the cargo started to
move to the ship rather than the
ship to the cargo.
— Because the cargo was now
intermodal, adjacent ports on the
same land mass could now
compete with each other and the
choice of port was, and often

still is, in the hands of the large
multinational liner operator.
— There was a need for a
comprehensive information
system and greater efficiency.
— A significantly smaller but better
trained work force was needed.
— Faster customs clearance, better
documentation procedure and a
review of much of the country’s
transportation law was required.

This table shows that the above ports,
though all relatively close to each other,
have all developed their container traffic
at different rates.

Top 10 Mediterranean Container
Ports
Rank Port Mn. TEUs in 2006
1 Algeciras 3.24
2 Gioia Tauro 2.94
3 Valencia 2.60
4 Barcelona 2.32
5 Genoa 1.66
6 Port Said East 1.60
7 Malta Freeport 1.49

8 Ambarli 1.45
9 Piraeus 1.39
10 La Spezia 1.12
Development of container
terminals
Figure 10a: Container terminal, 1970

Figure 10b: Container terminal, 1980
Figure 10c: Container terminal, 1990
Omitting ferry terminals which have

developed specialisms of their own,
many of the earlier container terminals
contained some facilities for Ro/Ro
loading and discharging and many of the
packaged lumber berths were of this
nature. This type of cargo-handling was
often referred to as STO/RO procedure.
However, to give themselves world-
wide flexibility, most of the ships that
now offer this type of facility have their
own very expensive and sophisticated
ramps.
By 2000 the outreach of the new
cranes at the larger terminals, such as
Yokohama, reached 63 metres to reach
across 22 boxes, which is a possible

athwartship stow in the current larger
generation of container ships. The new
gantry cranes in 2007 can now weigh
2,800 tons
Bulk cargo terminals
The development in size of these
terminals is very similar to that of
container vessel terminals, with the
Panamax (65,000 dwt) size being
popular in both groups. However, at the
higher end of the scale the bulk carriers
are larger, with some ore carriers in the
VLCC size. (See Analysis section re

bulk cargo-handling speed).
Bulk cargo-loading terminals are
usually situated as near as possible to
the source or with good rail connection
to the source, and loading will be some
variation of controlled gravity fall into
the hold.
This will be fast and often very dusty
which may now bring environmental
claims from people living nearby.
Cement dust for instance can be
troublesome to people living many miles
away downwind.
The discharging terminals will now
often be part of an industrial complex
situated in the port area and the complex

will often have its own dedicated
terminal, discharge equipment and
conveyor belts.

Chapter Three
Impact of Changing
Ship Technology on
Ports
Introduction—ship knowledge—ship
developments which influence port
development—effect of port time on
ship speed—other technical

developments affecting ports
Introduction
Although this is a book about ports there
are certain facts about ships which
anyone interested in ports must be aware
of, such as tonnage which usually forms
a vital part of a port’s pricing system
and terminal berth organisation. The
driving force for change in port
infrastructure, superstructure and
operations has been the changes in
certain aspects of ship technology and

changes in ship management’s attitude
and expectations.
Ship Knowledge
Tonnage
In shipping the term tonnage (ship size is
usually expressed in NT, GT, DWT or
LOA) can indicate many different
measures and anyone working in ports
should be familiar with most of them.
The following gives a brief summary of

the basic terms.
A tun was a barrel holding 252
gallons of wine. Remember that for
hundreds of years the tun was a much
valued container for the transport of
many cargoes. A 100-tun vessel was one
that could carry a hundred tuns. Hence
the word ton in shipping can denote both
weight and capacity.

Figure 11: Ship and cargo tons
Before 1982 GT was known as GRT
and NT as NRT. The R meant
Registered, as up to 1982 these tonnages
were given when the ship was
registered.
Brief history
In 1849 a Royal Commission originated
the concept that assessment of dues
should be based on the vessel’s potential
earning capacity. It was known as the
Moorsom system after the secretary of

the Commission, George Moorsom, and
came into force in 1854. The idea was
that gross tonnage would be a measure
of the vessel’s volume and that net
tonnage would be a measure of the
ship’s earning capacity. Port dues and
taxes were paid on these tonnages so
ship-owners looked for ways of
reducing them. Governments, to
encourage safety, would also offer
various exempted spaces as an
inducement to good building practices.
For instance, the double bottom was
exempted from gross tonnage if it was
used only for water ballast. The precise
definitions of measurement tonnage had

therefore become long, detailed and
complex and varied from country to
country.
In 1873 an International Tonnage
Commission met in Constantinople. Its
findings were not followed, except by
the authorities of the newly opened Suez
Canal.
In 1930 the League of Nations tried to
obtain universal agreement but it was not
followed by either the British or
Americans, although it was adopted by
most other countries.
In 1967 the Merchant Shipping
(Tonnage) Regulations were passed.
In 1969 the UN Agency, The

International Maritime Organisation
(IMO) held an International Convention
on Tonnage Measurement of Ships. This
convention at long last brought in a
universally accepted system of gross and
net tonnage on 18 July 1982.
Note: As these tonnages are
independent of the nationality of the ship
they no longer need to be linked to the
registration of the ship, so their official
title is Gross Tonnage (GT) instead of
Gross Registered Tonnage (GRT).
Likewise after 1982 NET tonnage is
abbreviated to NT instead of NRT.

Ship tonnage
Loaded displacement tonnage is the
actual weight of the ship and cargo.
Light displacement tonnage is the actual
weight of the ship. The difference
between the loaded displacement and the
light displacement is the weight that the
ship can actually carry and is known as
the deadweight tonnage. Gross tonnage
is, very simply, a measure of the total
enclosed volume of the ship in cubic
metres multiplied by a constant. The net
tonnage is the total enclosed volume
available for cargo in cubic metres
multiplied by a constant.

Displacement tonnage has little or no
commercial use. The size of tankers is
usually expressed in deadweight
tonnage, i.e. a 250,000-ton dwt tanker
means it can carry 250,000 tons of oil,
bunkers and stores at its summer draft. It
is more convenient when transporting
liquids to charge for the ton weight
carried, not only because it is a
relatively heavy cargo but the volume of
250,000 tons of oil can appreciably
change with a ten-degree variation in
temperature.
On the other hand, most general cargo
ships are usually full before they are
down to their marks, so a shipowner is

usually concerned with selling space and
he is more interested in the volume of
his ship rather than the weight it can
carry. Hence one usually talks of a cargo
ship of, for example, 9,000 gross
tonnage.
Figure 12: Typical relationship between LOA
and Dwt

When considering berth allocation
and assessing various dues, a vessel’s
length overall is obviously an important
factor. The above graph shows the
typical relationship that can be expected
between a ship’s length and her dwt
tonnage. Note that the length does not
increase at the same rate as the tonnage.
In fact P&O’s Grand Princess, which
entered service in mid-1998 and was
hailed by the press as the world’s largest
passenger liner, had a GT of 109,000
and a length of almost 950 feet.
Relationship between

tonnage, grt and draft
Draft for sailing ships
Due to its deeper keel the sailing vessel
had a deeper draft than the steamship, so
water depth was not the problem when
steam took over from sail, but it became
a major headache for port
administrations with the new ship types
that were introduced in the 1960s and
1970s.
The table on page 36 shows that
port’s problems with water depth came
when ships started to exceed 20,000 dwt

and had drafts in excess of 10 metres, as
few ports in the 1950s could offer
entrance channels of that depth.
Naturally enough there are designs for
special “reduced draft” large vessels.
For instance, the majority of cruise
liners, regardless of their tonnage, are
designed with a maximum draft of less
than 9 metres, as many of the best
terminals nearest historical sights have
only limited depths of water. Gas
carriers are also often designed so that
their loaded draft is less than 13 metres,
while naval architects designing
container ships are conscious of the
limited outreach of many gantry cranes,

so may reduce the breadth for larger
ships.
Ship Developments
which Influence Port
Development

Three major factors which have
influenced port development are:
(1) increase in the supply of ship
tonnage;
(2) specialisation in ship types,
cargo-handling features;
(3) increasing ship size.
1. Increase in the supply of
ship tonnage
As already stated, the GRT gives an
indication of the carrying capacity of the
world’s merchant fleet.

Figure 13: Growth of world GRT
As one would expect, the graph
above, showing the development of the
supply of ship tonnage, reflects very
closely the graph in Chapter two
showing the increase in world maritime
trade. What the graph does not indicate
is that this increase in supply of tonnage
is made up of a slow increase in the size
of ships until the 1960s, when ship size

increased rapidly.
2. Development in ship type
specialisation and equipment
The development in power-
driven vessels

In 1878 the number of steamships
equalled the number of sailing ships but
the table above shows that it was in the
last decade of the century that steam

tonnage exceeded sail tonnage. This tells
us that it was therefore the latter part of
the century before the large steamship
became the long-distance trading vessel.
It was, of course, the large steamships
that forced ports to develop and change,
as almost a century later it would be the
large bulkers and large container ships
which had a similar effect. It can also be
noted that steamships required a
different dock infrastructure to that of
sailing ships, just as container ships
require an even more radical change to
terminal design.

Development in type
specialisation
The term “specialised ship” is not a
precise technical expression but rather a
term used to cover ship types built and
designed to fit a specific or dedicated
purpose. They may be built for a variety
of reasons, such as allowing cargo like
heavy lifts to move which would not be
able to move otherwise. Alternatively
they may be introduced, like wine
tankers in 1946, as a way of moving that
specific cargo more productively. In
most cases a specialised ship type will
require specialised terminal facilities to

handle and store the cargo. It may
require special additions to the dock
architecture. In Rotterdam the large pure
car and truck carriers (PCTC) with their
high superstructure became very difficult
to manoeuvre in certain areas of the port
in cross winds. To overcome this
problem the Port of Rotterdam had to
design and build elaborate wind-breaks
along the side of a dock entrance.
The table on page 38 claims many
firsts and I suspect that there will be
readers who will disagree over some of
them. However, although I am naturally
concerned with accuracy, the real points
I want to show with the table are:

— The date when a development
was known to be in existence
and could be expected to
impinge on port operation.
— Those technical developments
were not just the steel steamship
and container ship but were
many, and almost continuous.
Date Details
1800
Around this time, when enclosed
docks first developed, the
standard vessel was a 300-ton
sailing ship.
First steamship on Clyde. In 1820
Glasgow directory listed 28
steamers out of Glasgow with

1812 passengers and stores to Islands
and Highlands. Steamships
required new designs in dock
and terminal construction.
1818
Savannah, an auxiliary steamer,
crosses the Atlantic.
1858
Great Eastern launched, 692ft
long, 18,914 GRT.
1860
Steam with sail, four hatches,
booms for sails as derricks.
1871
Telegraph communication to Far
East (Shanghai) 1888 Hong Kong
has local telephone system. The
importance of world-wide
communication in international
maritime trade is often not
appreciated.

1882 Dunedin, one of the first
refrigerated vessels for frozen
meat.
1884
Some liners equipped with 1.5 ton
cranes at hatch corners, 20ft
radius.
1885
First purpose built tanker, The
Glückauf.
1890
Union purchase introduced on the
W. Coast of America. (Note mast-
table and cross-tree required).
1892
Gt. Lakes have specialised self-
unloader Samuel Mitchell. 1916
converted to self-unloading
cement carrier. Still in service in
1981.
1910
Steel hatch covers fitted in large

colliers and ore carriers.
1920
First Heavy Lift Vessel Belfri
(3,400 dwt).
1920
Early 1920s last sailing ship
discharges in PLA.
1924
Harwich to Zeebrugge Ro/Ro
Train ferry.
1949
First ship with bulk sugar, the
Bara Haig, arrives in London
with 5,073 tons.
1952
Flush weathertight tweendeck
covers—steel weatherdeck
hatches commonplace.
1954
Lloyd's Register assign a class for
ore carriers.
1955 Introduction of car carriers.
First purpose built international

1969
trading container ship. Sulphur
tankers, phosphoric acid
tankers.
1976 First semi-submersible.
1985 First fruit juice carrier.
1986
Hatchless design in Australia.
First Bell Pioneer in service Oct.
1990
It should also be observed that some
technical developments became
universal almost immediately, some
progressed very slowly while others,
after a fanfare of publicity, disappeared
without trace. For instance, in the 1970s
many argued that integrated tug barges

would revolutionise maritime transport
and ports but little is heard of them now.
The 2000 columns in the following
table give a complete list of cargo-
carrying ships as regards their number
and their GT. The blanks in the 1965 and
1980 columns merely indicate that
Lloyd’s Register Annual Statistical
Tables did not give so much detail in
these years. These years are, I think,
worth including as they do show, for the
main types, where the increases and
decreases are. General cargo ships, for
instance, remained fairly constant in the
1970s. Container ships have grown
consistently throughout the period.

Oil/ore carriers and Ore, Bulk or Oil
carriers peaked around 1980 but as a
type seem to be lacking popularity at the
moment. In 2007 all Ro/Ro vessels
considered as one group.
The average age figure is interesting.
For all the cargo-carrying fleet it was
around 19 years in 2000, while for both
1965 and 1980 the average age was less
than 10 years. The world supply of ships
would seem to be getting older—
probably due to the relatively low
freight rates since 1973, leaving
insufficient margins for reinvestment. It
should also indicate that during the next
decade there must be either a reduction

in supply or a boom in shipbuilding.
However, the considerable rise in
freight rates in most of the shipping
markets during 2004 to 2007 would
suggest that the latter is very probable.

3. Development in ship size
See Chapter 4 on water depth.
The above table shows that for home
trade vessels (a term that was used to
designate ships that could trade around
UK and with Ireland and the near
continent) average size decreased
slightly—probably influenced by the
growing competition from the railways.
Foreign-going ships in both sail and
steam steadily increased in size. Sailing

ships are a good example of Professor
Parkinson’s Law which states that things
only achieve their optimum state just
before they become obsolete.
The table on page 40 shows that depth
of water was not a major issue until the
1960s. In 1950 Rotterdam still had only
10 metres. In 1970 there were only eight
ports in Europe which could accept the
new class of VLCC tankers and there
were no ports with sufficient depth of
water on the east coast of North

America. By 1975, following a period
of energetic dredging there were 22
ports in north-west Europe which could
accept such ships. Dredging is a very
expensive activity and the questions
facing port managers are:
— Will ships continue to get
bigger? Figure 14a, showing

average ship size since 1850,
does indicate a levelling off in
average ship size after 1980. If
the averages of the five largest
tankers are considered for each
year, it can be seen tanker size
peaked around 1975. If the same
exercise is considered for dry
bulk carriers their size seems to
have peaked around 1985–89.
— In 2004 there were 462
container ships with drafts
>13m, 1,558 tankers and 1,544
bulk carriers. Figure 15 (on page
41) shows the increasing size of
container ships, and that they are

still increasing.
— If so, should one dredge the old
channel or develop a new
terminal in an area which enjoys
deeper water?
Figure 14a: Growth of the average ship size
(GT) showing the number of ships with a
draft greater than 13 metres

Figure 14b: Percentage of ships versus draft
Ship size and container
terminal

Figure 15: Increasing size of container ships
Figure 15, showing the increasing size
of container ships, does not indicate
steady continuous growth but sudden
rises followed by long plateaux. If
container ship size continues to rise then
radical changes will be required for
terminals needed to service such
vessels.

Lloyd’s List (January 2001) used the
term Ultra Large Container Ships
(ULCS) of ships of 9,000–10,000 TEU
capacity. Other proposed terms are:
Suezmax container ship (12,000 TEU),
Malaccamax (18,000 TEU).
Lloyd’s List in January 2005 reported
that Cosco had orders valued at $566mn
for four 10,000 TEU container ships
(349m LOA, 45.6m breadth) due in
service in 2008. In 2006 the Estelle

Maersk had 170,794 gt, 158,000 dwt
and could carry 12,500 TEU.
However, in 2007 a spokesperson for
the Port of Los Angeles said that Los
Angeles would prefer two 6,000 box
ships a week rather than one 8,000+
vessel, due to the strain the latter put on
the inland distribution services.
The table above shows the numbers of

vessels in the accepted commercial
sector classification. As can be seen the
number of feeder vessels and their TEU
capacity is quite small but so is the
average length of their round voyage
compared with the post Panamax vessels
which will be used on the longer routes.
From the 3,000-box ship of 1972,
container ship size did not increase any
further until 1982 when the 4,000-box
ship was introduced. From there another
size plateau was sustained until the early
1990s when the 6,500-box ship
appeared. R.G. McLellan analyses this
growth in container size in a paper in the
Maritime Policy and Management

Journal, Volume 2, 1997. In this paper
he concludes that:
— One serious constraint on
building a 6,000+ box vessel
was the lack of an engine that
could generate the necessary
90,000 bhp capable of driving
such a vessel at 24.5 knots on a
single screw. However, the
development of the Sulzer
12RTA96C and the MAN B & W
12K98MC-C reduced this
problem.
— As ship’s beam increases,
cranes must increase in size.

This involves an increase in
weight and there comes a point
when the terminal cannot take the
extra load without considerable
civil engineering expense.
— As ship draft increases, depth of
water in ports becomes a
problem. Virtually all major
ports have 10 metres but few can
offer over 15 metres.
— For large ships to maintain the
same schedules as their smaller
brethren cargo-handling speeds
will have to be increased. From
this it follows that the terminal
area will need to be increased

Port management and operations

Port management and operations

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Port management and operations

Similar to Port management and operations (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Port management and operations